Showing posts with label Philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Philosophy. Show all posts

11/09/2011

Habermas on "The Political"

"
In a new book edited by Eduardo Mendieta and Jonathan VanAntwerpen, entitled "The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere" (Columbia University Press), you will find essays by Jürgen Habermas, Charles Taylor, Judith Butler and Cornel West.






Here are some excerpts from Jürgen Habermas's contribution ""The Political": The Rational Meaning of a Questionable Inheritance of Political Theology" (pp. 15-33):


"In the welfare state democracies of the latter half of the twentieth century, politics was still able to wield a steering influence on the diverging subsystems; it could still counterbalance tendencies toward social disintegration. (....) Today, under conditions of globalized capitalism, the political capacities for protecting social integration are becoming dangerously restricted. As economic globalization progresses, the picture that systems theory sketched of social modernization is acquiring ever sharper contours in reality. According to this interpretation, politics as a means of democratic self-determination has become as impossible as it is superfluous. (....) "The political" has been transformed into the code of a self-maintaining administrative system, so that democracy is in danger of becoming a mere facade, which the executive agencies turn toward their helpless clients." [p. 15f]


"Today the social sciences lay claim to the political system as their subject matter; they deal with "politics" that is, with the struggle for and the exercise of power, and also with "policies" - that is, the goals and strategies pursued by political actors in different fields. Besides normative political theory, philosophers have long since lost their special competence for the "political system". "The political" no longer appears to constitute a serious philosophical topic alongside "politics" and "policies"." [p. 16f]

"If we continue to understand "the political" as the symbolic medium of self-representation of a society that consciously influences the mechanisms of social integration, then the expansion of markets (....) involves, in fact, a certain degree of "depoliticization" of the society at large. [p. 20]. (....) In Carl Schmitt's view, liberalism is the force that robs politics of its significance for society as a whole - on the one hand, a functionally differentiated society is emancipated from the shaping force of politics and, on the other, the state is decoupled from a privatized religion that has lost its sting. Schmitt, therefore, develops a new and provocative concept of "the political" that is superficially adapted to mass democracy but preserves the authoritarian kernel of a sovereign power with its legitimizing relation to sacred history." [p. 21f]

"Of course, Carl Schmitt's clericofascist conception of "the political" is a matter of the past, but it must serve as a warning to all those who want to revive political theology. (....) In one way or the other, the diagnosis of a progressive "negation of the political" does not seem to have been refuted. The remaining worry can be put in a nutshell: How can respect for the inviolability of human dignity, and, more generally, a public awareness of the relevance of normative questions, be kept alive in the face of growing and disarming systemic strains on the social integration of our political communities?" [p. 23]

"In a liberal democracy, state power has lost its religious aura. And, in view of the fact of persisting pluralism, it is hard to see on which normative ground the historical step toward the secularization of state power could ever be reversed. This in turn requires a justification of constitutional essentials and the outcomes of the democratic process in ways that are neutral toward the cognitive claims of competing worldviews. Democratic legitimacy is the only one available today. (....) This is, however, not to deny the great insight of John Rawls: The liberal constitution itself must not ignore the contributions that religious groups can well make to the democratic process within civil society. (....) Rawls .... offers, with his idea of the "public use of reason", a promising key for explaining how the proper role of religion in the public sphere contributes to a rational interpretation of what we still might call "the political" as distinct from politics and policies. The only element transcending administrative politics and institutionalized power politics emerges from the anarchic use of communicative freedoms that keeps alive the spring tide of informal flows of public communication from below. Through these channels alone, vital and nonfundamentalist religious communities can become a transformative force in the center of a democratic civil society - all the more so when frictions between religious and secular voices provoke inspiring controversies on normative issues and thereby stimulate an awareness of their relevance." [p. 24f].

"The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere" is based on lectures given at SUNY Stony Brook in October 2010. Materials related to this event, including audio recordings and transcripts of the panel sessions, are available here.

See my previous post on the book here.

See excerpts from Craig Calhoun's afterword to the book here.

6/09/2011

Habermas receives Brunet Prize for Human Rights

Jürgen Habermas received the International Brunet Prize for Human Rights 2008 at a ceremony on May 9, 2009, in Pamplona, Spain. The prize was awarded by the Fundación Jaime Brunet and the Public University of Navarre (UPNA). The chairman of the Government of Navarra, Miguel Sanz, the president of Parliament, Elena Torres, and the rector of UPNA and president of the Foundation Brunet, Julio Lafuente, participated at the ceremony.

Read Habermas's acceptance speech (in German) here.


In his acceptance speech Habermas stressed that the human rights are the result of "political resistance against arbitrariness, repression and humiliation. After the constitutional revolutions of the eighteenth century they have gradually been incorporated into nearly all nations and all languages, but as often violated as confirmed."
"The struggle for the establishment of human rights continues in China, Africa, Bosnia or Kosovo, and also in our own countries. Every return of asylum applicants behind the closed entry at an airport, every sinking boat with people fleeing from poverty on their way from Libya to the island of Lampedusa puts a question to us - the citizens of Europe. The struggle for recognition of religious, racial and cultural minorities, for child protection, for equal treatment for homosexual couples and for equal working conditions between men and women is still ongoing - not to forget the young women from immigrant families who have to extricate themselves from the violence of a code of honor rooted in tradition." (unofficial translation).

Before the ceremony Habermas met the press. Asked about president Obama, he stated that "Obama is an American phenomenon and in Europe we have nothing comparable to him. After eight years of Bush, Obama has been a great gift. Something that sets us apart from the Americans is that they get exited about things that are not directly related to their personal interest. The history of Europe in the twentieth century has been quite complicated, and that makes it more appropriate that in Europe we are less enthusiastic and to a larger extend have our feet placed on the ground." (unofficial translation from "Diario de Navarra, May 9, 2009).

5/08/2011

New Blog on Habermas and Rawls

My blog will bring news on the two philosophers - Jürgen Habermas (1929-) and John Rawls (1921-2002). The blog will mainly have comments on new books and articles and information about conferences and other events. It will be written in both English and German.

The blog will be a supplement to the Habermas website www.habermasforum.dk, which I am co-editing. For an extensive bibliography on Habermas see this website.

5/06/2011

G.A. Cohen: Essays in Political Philosophy


On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice,
and Other Essays in Political Philosophy

by G. A. Cohen

(Princeton University Press, 2011)

288 pages



Description


G. A. Cohen was one of the most gifted, influential, and progressive voices in contemporary political philosophy. At the time of his death in 2009, he had plans to bring together a number of his most significant papers. This is the first of three volumes to realize those plans. Drawing on three decades of work, it contains previously uncollected articles that have shaped many of the central debates in political philosophy, as well as papers published here for the first time. In these pieces, Cohen asks what egalitarians have most reason to equalize, he considers the relationship between freedom and property, and he reflects upon ideal theory and political practice.

Contents [preview]

Part One: Luck Egalitarianism

Ch. 1: On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice [pdf]
Ch. 2: Equality of What? On Welfare, Goods, and Capabilities
Afterword to Ch. 1 & 2
Ch. 3: Sen on Capability, Freedom, and Control
Ch. 4: Expensive Taste Rides Again
Ch. 5: Luck and Equality
Ch. 6: Fairness and Legitimacy in Justice, And: Does Option Luck Ever Preserve Justice?

Part Two: Freedom and Property

Ch. 7: Capitalism, Freedom, and the Proletariat

Ch. 8: Freedom and Money [paper]
Two Addenda to Ch. 8

Part Three: Ideal Theory and Political Practice

Ch. 9: Mind the Gap

Ch. 10: Back to Socialist Basics
Ch. 11: How to Do Political Philosophy
Ch. 12: Rescuing Justice from Constructivism and Equality from the Basic Structure Restriction [draft]

Gerald A. Cohen (1941-2009) was Professor of Social and Political Theory at All Souls College, University of Oxford, from 1985 to 2008.

4/26/2011

Sales Philosophy - What You Believe Determines How Well You Sell



I have a simple sales philosophy: provide value first and make a friend at all costs. Now, what's YOURS? Do you believe every word of it? You should, if you want to be a great salesperson.

EVERY salesperson should have a sales philosophy that they firmly believe in.

It represents your values and defines who you are as a company and as a salesperson. It also affects how you approach your customers and how effective you are at making the sale. "I think I already have a sales philosophy..." You may think you have a good sales philosophy, but chances are it needs improvement. Does it accurately represent YOU? Is it as effective as you think it is? In reality, you probably fall into one of these two categories: A. You've been trained to follow some silly, scripted sales process you barely believe in, and may even hate. B. You've been in sales for what you consider to be a long time and have your "own way" of selling.

A: The Scripted Sales Philosophy

This usually happens to the newest of salespeople. They join the team, get a few scripts and are told to "go get 'em!" Let them get their teeth kicked in a few times, they'll learn. Is that really the best way to train someone in sales? Well, there is something to be said for failing your way to success, but you're disheartening and devaluing your recent sales investment-your new hires. There are very few times when a verbatim script will actively engage another human being, whether it's a cold call over the phone or in person. People buy from people, not a phony sales script. When your sales philosophy, or the one you are forced to swallow, doesn't match what you believe deep in your heart, you will NOT be a successful salesperson.

B: The Dated Sales Philosophy

So, you've been in sales for a long time and have grown accustomed to your own way of doing things, but is your method still working? Or has it gathered dust and lost its meaning, edge and effectiveness? Maybe you're stuck in your habits, or perhaps you're anxious about trying something completely new. Whatever your reason for sticking with this method, it's time to realize that this reality won't bring you the sales results that you want. Your numbers could be better if you let go of your excuses and old ways. Start with a new sales philosophy!

How do I develop a sales philosophy?

The key to developing a great sales philosophy depends on you and your individual values. The most important thing about is that you make sure it is completely YOURS. First, however, you must identify your company's unique sales philosophy: what it wants its customers to think about the company, the products and the people. Then you need to consider what YOUR personal sales philosophy is. What YOU want your customers to think about you, the products you have chosen to represent, and the company you have chosen to work for. There will often be some discrepancies between these two philosophies, but learning to work your own personal sales philosophy within your company is the key to success. Using a sales philosophy that is not in line with your own values will only leave you frustrated with lackluster results.

So stop using trained scripts and old habits that no longer represent you and what you have to offer as a salesperson! Identifying your unique sales philosophy and harnessing the power of its authenticity will give you the enthusiasm to achieve the results you desire! Your customers will see your self-confidence and trust coming to you for their needs. If you truly believe in your sales philosophy, your company and your product, they will, too!

4/02/2011

Book on the Habermas-Rawls Debate


Habermas and Rawls
Disputing the Political

Ed. by James Gordon Finlayson
& Fabian Freyenhagen


(Routledge, 2011)

315 pages


Description


Habermas and Rawls are two heavyweights of social and political philosophy, and they are undoubtedly the two most written about (and widely read) authors in this field. However, there has not been much informed and interesting work on the points of intersection between their projects, partly because their work comes from different traditions — roughly the European tradition of social and political theory and the Anglo-American analytic tradition of political philosophy. In this volume, contributors re-examine the Habermas-Rawls dispute with an eye toward the ways in which the dispute can cast light on current controversies about political philosophy more broadly. Moreover, the volume will cover a number of other salient issues on which Habermas and Rawls have interesting and divergent views, such as the political role of religion and international justice.

The volume includes a new article by Jürgen Habermas in which he comments on the contributions.

Contents

Introduction:
The Habermas-Rawls Dispute: Analysis and Re-evaluation
James Gordon Finlayson and Fabian Freyenhagen

Part I: The Habermas-Rawls Dispute

1: Reconciliation through the Public Reason (1995) - Jürgen Habermas
2: Political Liberalism: Reply to Habermas (1995) - John Rawls
3: Reasonable versus True (1996) - Jürgen Habermas

Part II: Disputing the Political

4: Justice: Transcendental not Metaphysical - Joseph Heath
5: The Justice of Justification - Anthony Simon Laden
6: The Justification of Justice (1999) - Rainer Forst
7: Procedure in Substance and Substance in Procedure - James Gledhill
8: Habermas, Rawls, and Moral Impartiality - Chris McMahon
9: Rawls and Habermas on the Place of Religion in the Political Domain - Catherine Audard
10: Two Models of Human Rights - Jeffrey Flynn

11: Beyond Overlapping Consensus - James Bohman

Part III: Afterword

12: A Reply to my Critics - Jürgen Habermas

James Gordon Finlayson is Senior Lecturer in Philosophy and Head of Social and Political Thought at the University of Sussex. He is the author of the excellent "Habermas: A Very Short Introduction" (Oxford University Press, 2005).

Fabian Freyenhagen is a lecturer in political philosophy at the University of Essex. He is the co-editor (with Thom Brooks) of "The Legacy of John Rawls" (Continuum, 2005).

3/31/2011

How to Earn a Graduate Degree in Philosophy



If you want to further your philosophical studies or prepare for a career in law, humanities or politics, a gradate degree in philosophy will help you. After receiving your undergraduate degree, pursuing a master's degree is usually the next option for students who enjoy reading, studying and applying the tenets of philosophy to everyday life.
Instructions
1. Choose a specific area of study. You may want to isolate your focus to social activism, or study the works of past masters like Plato if you are more oriented to research and academia. You may want to eventually teach philosophy or humanities.
2. Delve further into subjects like epistemology, which is the study of knowledge, or existentialism which centers on the belief that the individual has full responsibility for his or her own life. There are dozens of other schools of philosophical thought to explore as you study for your masters or other advanced degree.
3. Become more involved in outside activities that incorporate what you've learned in class, including political debate and social activism. If you are interested in a career in public service, use some of what you've learned in philosophy in your part time job or other government-focused activities.
4. Earn a graduate degree in philosophy as an excellent foundation for law school. This advanced degree also affords students interested in theology or religion a basis for work in the ministry or other spiritual careers.
5. Work toward a thesis or non-thesis degree. Some schools offer this option to students, depending on their ultimate goal. Non-thesis students use their philosophy studies as a springboard to a career in law, government or another area. Thesis students are academically oriented and go on to pursue a doctorate in philosophy or other scholarly discipline.
2. Job of Chief Executivewww.sim.edu.sg/JOCE
Systematic ways of approaching the CEO's multi-faceted role. Enrol
3. MSc in Investment Bankingwww.LSBF.org.uk/MSc-Banking
Leading Faculty, Top Career Service Elite London Business School. Apply
4. Master Programwww.unisg.ch/Master-Programs_Europe
Get a master's degree from the university St.Gallen - Switzerland
5. Brooklyn Law School L.L.Mwww.brooklaw.edu/llm
Study American law and the U.S. legal system in New York City

Source : http://www.ehow.com/how_2055080_earn-graduate-degree-philosophy.html

Interview with Michael Sandel

The new online journal "Art of Theory: A Political Philosophical Quarterly" brings an interview with Professor Michael Sandel (Harvard):

12 Questions with Michael Sandel

Excerpts:

Art of Theory: What features of our political life most puzzle you?

Sandel: I would say the largely arid terms of political discourse, the thinness of public discourse in the world’s leading democracies. That’s the single most striking and worrisome thing.

It’s partly the tendency, over the past three decades, of economics to crowd out politics. This has been an age of market triumphalism. We’ve come to the assumption that markets are the primary instruments for achieving the public good. I think that is a mistaken notion and people are now beginning to question that.

It also has led to political discourse being preoccupied with technocratic, managerial, economic concerns. The broader public questions and ethical questions have been crowded to the side. (....)

At the level of political theory (and this is what I’ve tried to do in some of my work), we need to challenge the premise that a pluralist society, or a society based on mutual respect, must avoid or set aside substantive moral and spiritual questions or questions of the good life.

Also at the level of political theory, I think there needs to be a challenge to economistic visions of democracy. (....)

Excellent political theory is determined by how interesting the question is. (....) After the question is chosen I am a methodological pluralist — a radical methodological pluralist — to the point where I don’t even think we could lay down any meaningful criteria for the right research method.

Michael Sandel is Professor of Government at Harvard University. His latest book is "Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?" (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009).

See some of my previous posts on Michael Sandel here, here, here & here.

3/30/2011

Toward a Positive Theory of Public Reason

Gillian Hadfield & Stephen Macedo have posted a new paper on SSRN:

"Rational Reasonableness: Toward a Positive Theory of Public Reason"

Abstract:
Why is it important for people to agree on and articulate shared reasons for just laws, rather than whatever reasons they personally find compelling? What, if any, practical role does public reason play in liberal democratic politics? We argue that the practical role of public reason can be better appreciated by examining the structural similarities in normative and positive political theory. Specifically, we consider the analytical parallels between Rawls’ account of political liberalism and a rational choice model of legal order recently proposed by Hadfield & Weingast (2011). The positive model proposes that a shared system of reasoning – a common logic – plays a key role in coordinating a stable equilibrium when legal rules depend on decentralized collective enforcement efforts by individual agents. The common logic enables individuals to predict how others will behave in the face of wrongful conduct and incentivizes participation in costly collective punishments by reassuring agents that their personal concerns will be taken into account in the resulting equilibrium. Rawls’s theory of political liberalism, we argue, is based on a comparable recognition that citizens in a pluralistic society face a practical as well as a moral problem in sustaining a stable political conception of justice. How can individual citizens have confidence that others will reciprocate their commitment to support fair and reasonable governing principles that depart from their own ideal conceptions of truth and value? Citizens face a practical problem of mutual assurance that public reason helps them solve by making individual ongoing commitments to a political conception of justice a matter of common knowledge. The solution, on both views, requires citizens’ reciprocal commitment to basing law on a system of shared public reasons. Both views thus place public reason at the core of liberal democratic politics in conditions of diversity, and for quite similar reasons. Our argument illustrates the (often) complementary roles of positive and values-based analysis in constitutional (in the broadest sense) design.

Gillian Hadfield is Professor of Law at the University of Southern California. See some of her recent papers here.

Stephen Macedo is Professor of Politics at Princeton University.

New book: Jürgen Habermas - Key Concepts


Jürgen Habermas: Key Concepts

ed. by Barbara Fultner

(Acumen, 2011)

256 pages




Description


A rare systematic thinker, Habermas has furthered our understanding of modernity, social interaction and linguistic practice, societal institutions, rationality, morality, the law, globalization, and the role of religion in multicultural societies. He has helped shape discussions of truth, objectivity, normativity, and the relationship between the human and the natural sciences. This volume provides an accessible and comprehensive conceptual map of Habermas's theoretical framework and its key concepts, including the theory of communicative action, discourse ethics, his social-political philosophy and their applications to contemporary issues. It will be an invaluable resource for both novice readers of Habermas and those interested in a more refined understanding of particular aspects of his work.

Contents

Introduction, Barbara Fultner

1. Historical and Intellectual Contexts, Max Pensky

Part I: Communicative Rationality

2. Postmetaphysical Thinking, Melissa Yates
3. Communicative Action and Formal Pragmatics, Barbara Fultner
4. System and Lifeworld, Joseph Heath
5. Autonomy, Agency, and the Self, Joel Anderson

Part II: Moral and Political Theory

6. Deliberative Democracy, Kevin Olson
7. Discourse Theory of Law, Christopher Zurn

Part III: Politics and Social Change

8. Civil Society and Social Movements, Keith Haysom
9. Cosmopolitan Democracy, Ciaran Cronin
10. Rationalization, Modernity, and Secularization, Eduardo Mendieta

Barbara Fultner is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Denison University, Ohio. She is translator of Jürgen Habermas's "Truth and Justification" (MIT Press, 2003) and his "On the Pragmatics of Social Interaction" (MIT Press, 2000).

3/28/2011

Review of "The Philosophy of Richard Rorty"


At "Notre Dame Philosophical Review", Paul Redding reviews "The Philosophy of Richard Rorty" (Open Court, 2010), ed. by Randall E. Auxier and Lewis Edwin Hahn:

Review of "The Philosophy of Richard Rorty"




Excerpt:

"And for Rorty, as for Mill, the good community is one which maximizes the chances of individuals creating unique lives, which for Rorty implies fashioning the "vocabularies" with which they shape their outlooks and behaviors. To the extent that traditional philosophy seeks a source for norms in something other than human agreement, it is to be regarded as just an extension of religion. In short, to see our ideas or language as trying to represent something essentially independent from us - seeing philosophical knowledge as ideally a "mirror of nature" - is just another instance of thinking of ourselves as responsible to something other than other human beings."

Paul Redding is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Sydney.

3/22/2011

HABERMAS’S THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE ACTION AND THE THEORY OF SOCIAL CAPITAL

Roger Bolton (Department of Economics and Center for Environmental Studies)

Williams College I am bringing together two clusters of ideas I think are important. One is the thought of the German writer Jürgen Habermas, a prominent philosopher whose ideas are meaningful to many of our colleagues who are what I’ll call “planning academics,” that is scholars who teach planning in universities. The other is a cluster of ideas on social capital and social networks.
Habermas is a contemporary philosopher with a worldwide reputation. One of his best-known ideas is communicative action, in which actors in society seek to reach common understanding and to coordinate actions by reasoned argument, consensus, and cooperation rather than strategic action strictly in pursuit of their own goals (Habermas, 1984, p. 86). However, it’s not only his general fame that makes him relevant to social capital and networks. There are other reasons more specific to geography and regional science. One is that many geographers, sociologists, and planning theorists appeal to his ideas in their work (though not many economists do).
Prominent examples are scholars who apply Habermas’s ideas to a general (but not Marxist) critique of late capitalist societies, to analysis of mass movements, and to normative assessments of planning practice (see for example Healey 1997, Forester 1985, 1992, Miller 1992, 2000, Barnes and Sheppard 1992).
Another reason is that Habermas provides a theoretical basis for a view of planning that emphasizes widespread public participation, sharing of information with the public, reaching consensus through public dialogue rather than exercise of power, avoiding privileging of experts and bureaucrats, and replacing the model of the technical expert with one of the reflective planner (Argyris and Schön 1974, Schön 1983, Innes 1995, Lauria and Soll 1996, Wilson 1997). In this view, the legitimacy of democracy depends not only on constitutional processes of enacting laws, but also on "the discursive quality of the full processes of deliberation leading up to such a result," as Stephen White (1995, p.12) puts it. John Dryzek notes Habermas prompts the policy analyst to work on conditions of political interaction and design of institutions rather than merely the content of policy proposals, and Habermasian ideal institutions rule out “authority based on anything other than a good argument” (1995, pp. 108-110).
A third reason, from almost the beginning of an understanding of Habermas's communicative action one sees the possibility of a connection to social capital. Communicative action is individual action designed to promote common understanding in a group and to promote cooperation, as opposed to "strategic action" designed simply to achieve one's personal goals (Habermas 1984, especially pp. 85-101, 284-8). Habermas does not use the term “social capital,” but a reader can see possible connections while reading what he says about other things. Some planning theorists believe a desideratum of planning is the encouragement of communicative action to facilitate the production of social capital. The relevance to planning is suggested by Habermas’s statement: “In the case of communicative action the interpretive accomplishments on which cooperative processes of interpretation are based represent the mechanism for coordinating action …." (1984, 101; italics "coordinating" in original, italics on "cooperative" added).
He is one of the most renowned philosophers and social theorists of our time and undoubtedly the best known German philosopher. His stance as a “critical theorist”—the most famous of the “Frankfurt School”—and his ideas of communicative action and the “public sphere” are known to many intellectuals in a variety of disciplines. There are many books and essays, and extensive traffic in messages on electronic mailing lists, expositing, interpreting, and criticizing him, and scholars apply his theories to politics, law, law, philosophy of science, education, theology, literary studies, even the performing arts (Singer 2000). No ivory tower theorist, he is a highly visible public intellectual and participates in many public discussions in Germany and in elsewhere in Europe. He is known as an advocate of reform and democratization of universities in Germany. After a series of lectures by Habermas in China, a leading Chinese philosopher, Jin Xiping, noted that translations of Habermas were available in China far more readily than ones of Heidegger or Derrida, and said, “Almost everyone knows Habermas as the last great social critic" (Calloway 2001). “He is comparable to Hegel [in] his enormous, positive, intellectual achievement ….”—this from James Marsh, who is also one of the sharpest critics (Marsh 2000, p. 565). Habermas is also known as a scholar who is thoroughly steeped in the thought of philosophers and social scientists who preceded him, and for extensive use of sociology and Anglo-American philosophy in his work. Perhaps of special interest to scholars in regional science is his reliance on but also and criticism of Max Weber.
The literature on social capital that is dominant in the social sciences today does not say much about links to Habermas. Therefore, it seems worthwhile to investigate possible connections, and also to compare a Habermasian approach to some examples of the more dominant approach. This paper is organized as follows: Section II is a brief biographical sketch of Habermas, then Sections III through VI describe and comment on important parts of his social theory, being on social actions (Section III), details of the theory of communicative action (Section IV), the theory of the lifeworld and how it complements the theory of communicative action (Section V), and the muted legacy of Marx (Section VI). Section VII presents preliminary conclusions on the relevance of Habermas to theories of social capital, and Section VIII describes two important recent models of social capital formation from economic theory. Section IX concludes.

Source: http://web.williams.edu/Economics/papers/Habermas.pdf

Download Full PDF Articles here

1/10/2011

Is ‘God exists’ a ‘hinge proposition’ of religious belief?

Unlike many of our other beliefs which lack apriori support, however, it is often alleged that belief in the existence of God could never be epistemically supported in an empirical manner either. Suppose that one argued, àla G. E. Moore,3 that one’s belief in the existence of the external world is warranted on the grounds that one possesses suffi-cient empirical evidence to warrant one’s belief in an everyday proposition (such as “I have two hands”), which, if true, would entail the existence of the external world. – whether we believe in God or not – the latter merely attacks a significant portion of the beliefs of a person who has the requisite religious beliefs.

Take the argument proffered above concerning our belief in the external world. We are thus still lumbered with the original problem of how one can have a warranted belief in an everyday proposition when this warrant presupposes that one has a warranted belief in a hinge proposition, a proposition which is held to be unwarrantable. One does, however, find traces of the hinge proposition thesis in two sorts of anti-sceptical strategies which are adduced in defence of religious belief. One of the most famous examples of the first sort of anti-sceptical tactic can be found in John Henry Newman’s lectures on religious belief,8 texts of which were, interestingly, a major influence on Wittgenstein’s On Certainty.9 In essence, Newman’s approach to the problem of scepticism about religious belief was to argue that local scepticism about religious belief is unfounded because one has equal grounds to be sceptical about all belief. If is thus irrelevant to make a specific charge against religious belief on the basis that it is posited upon certain pivotal ungrounded beliefs (such as in the exist-ence of God), when there is nothing unique about religious belief in this respect. Rather, we should recognise that all belief is based upon ungrounded presuppositions, and therefore discharge the pervasive thought that there is any epistemic difference in kind between, say, scientific belief and religious belief. Whilst noting that the traditional sceptical argument against religious belief will fixate on this ‘presuppositional’ component of Augustine’s reasoning, Wolterstorff makes no explicit counter-response. He does not, for instance, argue that Augustine is indeed warranted in believing in God, or claim that his belief in God’s agency can be warranted in the absence of a warranted belief in God. 3. Blocking the argument

The contemporary debate about the epistemic status of religious belief thus owes a great deal to a certain pessimism about the prospects of responding to a local scepticism applied to those beliefs. There will thus be nothing to prevent, in principle, the possession of knowledge or warranted belief in the non-framework propositions which presuppose that belief in these hinge propositions is epistemically sanctioned. On the other, if one does not, in fact, have an appropriately sensitive belief in these framework propositions, then the doxastic architecture which presupposes a sufficient epistemic status for these beliefs will lack the requisite foundation. If, on the other hand, Augustine lacks a sensitive belief in God’s existence, then it will follow that, just as we would expect, his religious beliefs are indeed without warrant.

In this respect, then, religious belief is no different to any other sort of belief where one has to presuppose epistemic support for one’s conviction in certain pivotal propositions without being in a position to reflectively determine that this support obtains. There is indeed nothing epistemologically unique about religious belief. The sceptic contraposes on this principle when she argues that it follows from our lack of warrant for our belief in the external world and our knowledge that many everyday propositions entail the existence of the external world, that we must lack a warrant for our belief in these everyday propositions as well. Of related interest, however, is Norman Malcolm’s defence of the rationality of religious belief in “The Groundlessness of Belief”, Thought and Knowl-


In “Do Religious Beliefs Need Grounds?”, Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift 40 (1986): 227–237, Terence Penelhum offers an excellent discussion of the manner in which some theists (he focuses on Pascal and Kierkegaard) have attempted to defend the rationality of religious belief by adducing radical sceptical arguments. On the other, there are those, such as Alston, “Is Religious Belief Rational?” In his earlier work – such as “Is Belief in God Properly Basic?”, Nous 15 (1981): 41–51; “Rationality and Religious Belief”, Contemporary Philosophy of Religion, eds. Steven M. Cahn & David Shatz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982), pp. 255–277; and ‘Reason and Belief in God’, Faith and Rationality: Reason and Belief in God, eds. A. Plantinga & N. Wolterstorff (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1983), pp. 127–146 – he is largely content merely to argue that there is nothing inherent to the foundationalist model that would exclude the possibility that belief in god could be epistemologically ‘basic’.

download pdf full articles here

1/03/2011

Philosophy Degrees - What Careers Options Are Available?

Philosophy deals with morality and contemplating right and wrong. You may be wondering how this will transfer into a job after college. If you are thinking about earning a philosophy degree, it is important to know what career options are available to you after graduation.

Law - Philosophy graduates have the skills to think, write clearly, and present a good arguement. This lends them to do quite well in the law field. Many students will use their philosophy degree as a jumping point to starting their law degree or will work in legal departments in large corporations.

Health - Philosophy graduates often become practitioners or administrators in the medical field. Also, those with a philosophy degree have a high acceptance rate into medical school.

Sales - Philosophers often have great success in the professional sales arena due to their research, reasoning, and arguing skills. Many work in a business setting and maintain a large network of customers.

Government Affairs/Lobbying - A degree in philosophy is a great start to a career in politics. Lobbyists, especially, are known for their skills in reasoning, deduction, and arguing. Many graduates go on to have careers as a political analyst or lobbyist working for politicians, private firms, or as consultants.

More and more universities are opening up their philosophy degree programs to online students. You will graduate with many different marketable skills, and the analytical skills you gain when pursuing your degree transfer wonderfully into many varied career fields and environments, making this an exciting and rewarding career option.

Idealism and Philosophy (and Education on Both)

Before we begin it is important to understand the basic definitions of Idealism and Philosophy. Education in these two areas is very rare in modern society, although we will teach children Social Studies in grade 2, the basic questions of Who am I and Why am I here are left until much later (often university). When you mention the idea of philosophy you are usually met with bored expressions and a complete lack of interest. Why? Because these questions are very dangerous to the society we have built and live in.

Idealism is defined as the view that the existence of objects depends wholly or in part on the minds of those perceiving them. This definition is not complete by any means, in fact those who truly explore Idealistic concepts often come to the point where physical reality is nothing more than symbolism for the workings of the mind. This might sound strange and a little far-fetched but that is only because we are used to one particular view of the world, to explore another view would require a great deal of courage and the acceptance that You are not simply an accumulation of your beliefs.

Philosophy is defined as the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics. Nothing about the realm of Philosophy states that it must lead you to Idealism yet, for those who explore philosophy deeply enough, it often does. Philosophy was once looked upon as one of our species highest callings. Socrates, Plato, and other familiar names are familiar for exactly this reason; they were respected, admired, and seen as brilliant to those willing to listen to their words. Sad to say, society was very different back then.

Unfortunately it is impossible to explore all of the concepts and ideas involved in Philosophy in just one short article, but that doesn't mean you cannot go looking for yourself. It is important to remember though that not every "would-be philosopher" is worth listening to. An easy way to discern who is and who is not thinking clearly about existence and knowledge is to see how much they boost their own self-importance.

Look for the humble, serious philosophers such as Jiddu Krishnamurti (who rejected the offer to be named Messiah in the early 1900's) and Alan Watts. Find some of their videos, their books, and a website focused on discussing the concepts and ideas that are the root of their many lectures and books. It is important to get familiar with Idealism and Philosophy, and education in these fields will reveal why it is so important. There is a whole other multi-layered facet to life that needs to be explored in our modern society; our growth as a human being, a species and a culture depends on it.

1/01/2011

What Is Your Running Philosophy?

There's a lot of different motivations that people can have to run. Some people run for health or to lose weight. Other people just like the social aspects. And those are certainly big benefits that I enjoy, but they aren't the main reason that I run.

Discovering why you run can help you direct your training and which races you are going to attend, and will help you decide when it might be time to play it safe and back off in your training or when the rewards justify pushing your own limits to see just how close to red-lining you can get without actually forcing an injury on yourself.

The big thing for me has always been the competition aspect of running. That's just been one of the greatest motivations for me to get out there.

I like being able to test yourself against how you ran in the past, and how you can run against everybody in your community. With some of the bigger races, I love how you can run against people across the country or across the world, and how when you toe the starting line, there's little to no difference between you and your fellow man. You can be racing a field of elite runners, but the course they run is the same course that you will. It's just fascinating to me.

Now as I've gotten older I've found that I like pushing my limits and running further and further. This isn't to say that I'm enjoying things that others can't do because most people are certainly capable of doing the same feats that I've done. I've found it's just more interesting to do things that other people won't necessarily choose to go out and do and which they wouldn't consider anybody who does do these sorts of events to be in their right mind.

For example, some of my favorite races to date have involved running for 50 miles out in the desert, or racing 50 kilometers back and forth on a 2 mile stretch of road in 97 degree heat. Those are the kind of things I actually enjoy doing that most others would never even consider. I find them fun, just running for hours on end.

The biggest thing anyone can do is just to get out there and make sure that you enjoy whatever activity you are taking part in and to find whatever your motivations are. Once you find what they are, latch on to them and run with it.

Unveiling the Mask of Philosophy Essay

In this weeks journal we are discussing the essays of Kucklick, Outlaw, Locke, and West. "The Changing Character of Philosophizing in America", an essay about the periods of philosophy and how it had an impact in shaping philosophy. "Philosophy, African-Americans, and the Unfinished American Revolution", an essay reasoning why African American philosophy was suppressed and what this has done to the future of philosophy. "Good Reading", an essay on the character of philosophy. And "Philosophy, Politics, and Power: An Afro-American Perspective", an essay on African-Americans having a revolution.

"The Changing Character of Philosophizing in American" started off in the middle of the seventeenth century...the First World War I. Kucklick discusses how during this time early philosophy started off with the Puritans and how priests were considered to be the philosophers. At this time philosophers were considered to be the "public man." Kucklick says how these thinkers based their ideas off of human, nature, the divine, godly ways (the bible). Later Kucklick goes on to talk about the second period, which was the first third of the eighteenth century, World War II.

During this time science was starting to come into play. This is when you have your Newton and Locke stirring up conflict with those who based things on the divine and spiritual truth. Newton came in and had people realizing that science played a role in the development of philosophy. With this you have Jonathan Edwards, Cotton Mather, and Benjamin Franklin coming into the picture and realizing that there was a union between science, philosophy, and religion...Kucklicks third period, after World War II, the twentieth century is when things started to become more technical. Your philosophers came to be known as your teachers, professors, and some of your politicians. This brought techniques of popularity and ideas from the past to be the barrier between the different philosophers. Kucklick goes on to talk about how the future of philosophy was going down hill. The philosophers he called "ignorantly provincial, naïve, and woolly-minded", stating that philosophers have disregarded the history of philosophy.

"Philosophy, African-Americans, and the Unfinished American Revolution", starts off giving you the background of the word philosophy, which came to be known as the realm of the architect and custodian of the specifications of what it means to be human. This came was said to come from the people in Europe, which claimed themselves to be the only ones who knew where knowledge came from. Outlaw goes on to talk about how politics had an affect on philosophy dealing with the social classes between very wealthy and the working class. He also goes into great detail about the suppression of African-Americans. He seems to believe that these philosophers were basing everything on the White-Americans. When they were not the only ones there. It was as if they had forgot that when they came over that they brought Africans with them and the Indians were already there. They only looked at their traditions and their culture. Which bring forth the question, how can you say there is no such thing as African American Philosophy? What makes your background philosophy and mine not? Outlaw still thinks that blacks are still going through this suppression, but we are to blind to even realize this.

"Good Reading," and" Philosophy, Politics, and Power: An Afro-American Perspective", talked about what philosophy was and what it has become. Both of these essays discuss the emphasis that used to be placed on philosophy and how now it has turned into something that no one really pays that much attention to anymore. Philosophy has become one of those things that bores people and can only be understood by the intellects. But, West also has another idea. He speaks of a revolution of blacks that he thinks should take place soon.

To conclude these readings have torn us in many directions on where to find out what the animal African- American Philosophy really is. From Kucklicks theory from the Bible to Outlaws idea of suppression one can see that there is an animal called African-American Philosophy, and we have just discovered it.

12/27/2010

Philosophy of the Economy

Plan

Chapters:

1. Introduction.
2. History of development
3. Levels of Development: distinctive points, changes and reason for changes
4. Philosophy of Development
5. Psychology of Development
6. Social changes and consequences of Development
7. Nationalism, Ideologies and Political Systems enforcing them.
8. Economy and Market Forces: Historical Development
9. Globalization and consequences
10. Most Developed Countries different approaches in the modern world
11. From struggle to survive among individuals, societies, countries, blocks of a pro Supply Economy to a Regulated pro balance between Supply and Demand Economy
12. Life in Modern Developed Countries
13. Social tools of acceleration and deceleration.

Chapter I - Introduction

The Globalization has become an irreversible historical process constantly expanding and evolving at the same time the social and economic conditions in the most developed nations have succeeded raising productivity and concentration of capital. The old tools of Economics cannot anymore accommodate these new developments and are not able to establish most favored conditions for such an important to the World and for any individual countries new development to evolve smoothly by avoiding major economical crises and without destroying the environment. Having inadequate Economical Tools creates volatile market conditions which work in conflict with current possibilities of market expansion: this research is to proof the change from a Scarce Economics based on volatile interest rates fluctuations and deregulated speculations into a Market Economics based on market stability, regulated economics and Global Expansion of even small to medium size businesses and investors.

With the current system of Economics even the very resilient US economy will not be able to sustain the ravaging forces of shrinking profit margins and market crashes. It has become obvious for a company to maintain its profitability it must go Global /also National for US and EU/: but the Medium to Small companies and Investors are hardly capable going global in a highly deregulated markets and exchanges.

There are great possibilities in a Global scale for establishing a heavy regulated but at the same time free market place where more individuals from elsewhere will be able to compete in very increasing intellectual competition; this process could be accelerated by increasing the security of doing business and investing capital which will increase the LTV and MTV of the assets and even further to enhance some currently considered liabilities or with very limited LTV and MTV. When doing that the Monetary policies will change because of this extra security so more money will be able to circulate without provoking inflation; then more business and investment will follow and gradually these rules and regulations will envelope more markets around the Globe to establish a Global Market Place for even Medium to Small Business and Investors having such Global access.

This is the end of the shady Trickle Down Economics or the bureaucratized Socialized Economics and the beginning of a real Market Economics /called by me a Market Stability Economics/ because it relies on the Market Competition and on Regulated Business Practices and Direct and Indirect Investment under clearly stated laws and regulations implemented by the Governments but controlled by the Courts.

All these is becoming possible only in the very recent times by the incredible developments of the Internet, related technologies and communications; the fall of the Eastern Communist Block, the expansion of the European Union, the entering of WTO by China and by the expending freedom of business all over the Globe which as a consequence increased Global Productivity, Access to the Market Place, quick jump from Ideas to Realization, opening the Global Employment Market, allowing expanding Global Direct Investment, allowing Internet Education and Self Education. The World has changed forever.

The following is a Philosophical Conception attempting to substantiate the new changes through Historical sequence of developments and conclusions.

Economy is one of the reasons setting our life in motion and moderating our personal desires and behavior with compliance with the social rules of organization to accomplish highly sophisticated structures of societies and countries and lately economic blocks.

Many historical occurrences could be explained by the Economics and the ways individuals and societies are affected by it. The competition among individuals for economical and political advance in any society which competition has grown into Global has always been the way bringing innovations, improvements and progress but in the same time bringing corruption, injustice and the following revolutions and terrorism.

The Individual Desire for Success and the following competition among individuals is in the beginning of relations between individuals and societies as a general driving force which organized societies into countries, empires and economic blocks. A constant struggle between the interests of the society and individual interests is regulated by cultural and religious rules and common laws which moderate and leverage this relationship so the societies could function.

Historically the competition for success has moved from more primitive and physical one using more physical tools and methods for success to more intellectual and abstract one using more intellectual methods for success. So consequently of such changing priorities the social rules of behavior have changed accenting on these constantly evolving values.

Economy is a main field for individuals' competition and also a general tool for comparison among societies; it has been evolving and changing with the new values invoked by the the general intellectualisation. Relativity of a society or group of societies to adjust their values through rules and common laws to fit a Current International Level of Development-CILOD is called Country's /for this society/ Current Level of Development- CCLOD. This philosophical law of Social Relativity SR is to be established based on historical statistics and method of comparisons. Every single moment in history has its CILOD and every society has its CCLOD at any time of its existence.

Why are we attempting to figure out the relativity of historical economic and social development?

The up to now marginal understanding of the processes of human development by the Philosophy over all has being limiting the abilities of different societies to find for themselves best ways for development: thus ideologies such as pro Capitalistic or pro Socialistic, or pro religious Fundamentalistic have been playing role in preventing philosophy to clear the values and reasons for socio-economic progress and development. The disconnection between Philosophy and Economics for some time has fragmented general abilities for comprehending a conclusive system of evaluation and consequential objectivism. Economics has drifted away from philosophical thought to a practical science of statistics and ideological self-adjustments. The desire of practical clearance of ideas has taken over philosophical reevaluations of sometimes subjective values. In context of such ideological more like status quo science of Modern Economics real historical possibilities have been sidelined and obscured as not complying with the "political correctness" and its accents. The same approach certainly applies to the ways different tools of Economics have been evaluated and used however under economic and social pressures Economics has been evolving an examples is the change form the Gold reserve backed currencies in the past to the more abstract current system.

The evaluation of the basic inflationary processes, the most recent effect of high tech developments, Internet and Worldwide Political liberalization causing fast Globalization; even the past changes from Farming driven Economics to Manufacturing Economics and now to Services and Investment Economics have been poorly evaluated not followed into conclusions and consequent resolutions which is to bring a coherent philosophical systems to describe these changes and provide guidelines to the Future; the understanding of Economic and Social tools historically has been very fragmented over the board.

The consequence of such insufficient approaches toward Economics have been many wars, revolutions, totalitarian dictatorships,depressions and most recently the rise of religious fundamentalism and terrorism. One will say that I am going too far in giving the Economics such powers: he or she could be right there are political situation driven by social forces not relating economy on their surface but beyond any socio ideological motion stay pressures of social expectation of certain values and motivations and such pressure is still a product of individuals' desire for competition which was steered to ideological values because of lock of economic competition for majority of individuals to participate, and because governments' role have always been to defend the status quot of socials structures the energies which could be used for such economic competition have been flown into nationalism, racism, chauvinism and the general ideologies as well

If in prospective we evaluate the economic and social reasons for the Second World War as an example when the conception of imperialism at the time by Hitler and by any world powers that appropriating foreign resources and occupying others' assets was considered equitable when if a detail evaluation is done these neighboring countries could have been much more beneficial as trading partners which you can see in the new developments in Europe; Such an example of conceptual misunderstanding of economic and social tools by all of the great powers and Nazi Germany was a result of this mindless war which did not do any good to anyone but after the devastation it made clear that unleashing the dark powers of individuals' powers instead of using their creativity is worthless. In the new world of rising terrorism such misunderstanding of reality by the Most Developed Countries' Governments could have fatal consequences for any country or even for the World. To try to suppress millions of people living in poverty and religious fanaticism is not a feasible way to go forward into a new world when the possibilities of the Current International Level of Development to engage Worldwide individuals into a productive competition are real; denials of opening these opportunities by the Most Developed Countries based on ideologies such as status quo US capitalism or in case Chinese socialism, or European social bureaucratism, or nationalism, or whatever prejudice will only bring tensions, insecurity and environmental disasters..

One will say if there are too many economic and social factors to be put together in a way which can provide comprehensive evaluation, is it correct?

Yes if the information is accumulated with no strict guidelines. In case the principles of this conception is simplicity: not ignoring any major factors for socio-economic development but concentrating on the guiding ones that have the most effect on the projected development.

How competition could be considered main engine of individual and social relations and development?

There are countless numbers of traditional and circumstantial factors in an individual life which play roles in characterizing this individual and his/her correlations and social interactions. The economic factors are limited but very important part of this process. The conditions in which an individual grows up, the stability of day to day life, the possibilities in front of him/her, the positive and negative pressures on him/her by the society; obviously negative economic pressure could have very depressing and mind altering effect on ones character; the lock of opportunities could contribute to ones instability and perplexities. Historically ideologies, religions, nationalism and general culture have helped offset the instability the lock of socio-economic opportunities to the majority. The social structures have established an array of tools to suppress individual Desire for Competition which suppression `historically has been antagonistic based on classes', nationality and other belongings to limit majority of individuals from competing for socio-economic advance. But in a world of low productivity and political chaos such limits of competition ware actually positive for the stability and the survival of these societies

The main competition for individual success has changed not only from physical to intellectual but also from very limited opportunities for particular classes to more general and accessible; this process of opening of socio-economic competition to higher percentage of the population is at its best in the Most Developed Countries which historically have always been the most advance socio-economically thus at any PCLOD the CCLOD of the MDC is basically a result the best adaptability of this country or block at the historical moment to use in a better way Current Possibilities' potentials of their citizens in the most productive at this moment ways. Because in different historical moments different socio-economic structures were working best, examples: the Roman Empire's strong militaristic approach supported by political power needed militaristic organization and social philosophy to dominate the current World thus Roman structures were best reflecting the PCLOD and therefore Rome dominated the known world she was the best adapted under the circumstances. Other examples are ancient Persia, China, and Aztecs in the Americas.

Obviously to base this philosophical conclusion on the approach of evaluating these historical changes the continuity and relativity of these changes have to establish: and it may be best presented as a change of socio-economic philosophy and psychology from pro physical pro manual one reflecting at the time manual labor economic approach as dominating to a pro intellectual one apprehended by the developing high technologies and economic globalization one when intellectual economic approach is dominating. This socio-economic evolution is reflected into historical changes; here it needs to be mentioned that they were periods in the World history when these processes of intellectualization were severely interrupted and even reversed an example are the Dark Ages in Europe, or the Mao's governing of China the changes are not necessary a flowing continuation but more like a spiral like continuation.

Someone will say that this philosophy replicate Marxism for these people my answer is that Marxism was based on development based on struggle between the having and having not classes when this Philosophy of the Economy is based on the historical continues change of historical priorities from physical to intellectual. Which I believe has given the opportunity of the human civilization to advance. So as an example when technologies and socio-economic structures were underdeveloped appropriating foreign resources was the only way was a country to advance into interstates competition therefore the best organized countries were establishing their empires by concurring others and imperialistic foreign policies were supporting them: in such socio-economic environment individuals' competition was redirected into militaristic by nationalism and ideologies Individual Desire for Advance was obviously related to individual advance by militaristic ways. The same principle of timely important values applies to pre historic times when instead the organization militaristic skills of the time of the empires, personal physical personal strength had been much more valuable therefore the "heroes" from the Ancient Greek mythology were compared and related to the gods. When Great Empires before the Great Wars of the 20th Century were occupying the known World the mentality of conquest and spread of civilization was reflected in the literature, economics and science of that time to justify their policies fierce nationalism and chauvinism were promoted by the Governments and other institutions: "the philosophy of being better meant being militarily stronger, and even on a common level that a man is not one unless going through the army" prepared individuals for the armies and multiple devastating wars. Now days such "philosophy" sounds almost comical; people have understood the consequences of wars and they are used only under extreme circumstances.

Throughout history continues accumulated information was needed for successful competition which is another factor for coming to a new Current International Level of Development. Such higher ground can be reached only by expanding and enhancing current possibilities which always are a result of improving economies and political structures. On the ground base improving technologies, trade relations and business environment in any time of history had prompted a new CILOD.

When productivity was low classes based on individuals' background and individuals' access to resources and position in the society have been playing dominant role in societies around the world. Because of the low productivity to maintain "normal" level in the society multiple servants and feudal taxes were needed. Thus the theory of scarce resources was born. To suppress individuals for demanding more participation in economic competition a philosophy of servitude and tyranny of oppression was established: all over the world.

The negative socio-economic pressures on individuals accumulated in such conditions usually brought rebellions and revolutions therefore societies needed release valves: the nationalism, chauvinism, xenophobia, religious hatred have naturally been parts of such social negative built up releasing system which was promoted by government and negative social pressures were channeled into regional wars and constant insecurity.

The next and higher step in this social prevention system were the ideologies which were higher more sophisticated level of prejudice: in both systems of negative pressure releases any individuals not complying with the "acclaimed" ideas were persecuted and considered asocial and sometimes even enemy of the states: ideas for righteousness fitting some current criteria have been used and continued to being used for the same purposes even to promote belonging to causes and principles to suppress individual desire for success.

The theory of Scarce Resources has being based on a pro supply economics and competition it reflects the allowed by this conception limited percent of individuals access to fair competition which is accessible mostly for the upper classes who control big business and investment in now days. The Scarce Resources Economics including access to good education, to borrowing Capital, to market exchanges investing is pro Supply and the supply has been controlled by the big business and large investment groups and their strong lobbyists; the Governments have been part of this system by promoting their interests.

US is a perfect example how this conception works where good schools are quite expensive and the theory of income based education is dominant: which theory was probably good for a steady developing US economy and not so good for the rapidly developing global market which promotes different kind of competition by globalizing the labor market so the large corporation are looking elsewhere for qualified scientists and technicians, following on such demand large US Universities responded by creating graduate programs in science where high % PHD graduates are of foreign origin. Same conception prompted number of software specialists and medical doctors to come from India and elsewhere to fill the existing demand in US. So far Business Graduate Schools even opening some competition are lingering behind relying on the more conservative and seemingly less demanding business competition as still a steady place for the upper classes kids to be promoted but with the Europeans and Chinese's high accessibility for commoners to all strong undergraduate educational programs and the becoming extremely sophisticated Global business a demand for highly intellectual business managers will drive Business Schools toward similar to the science faculties global approaches of admittance and scholarships.

The philosophy of Scarce Resources doesn't reflect the demand for allowing more access to competition in order a society to keep up with the global development. Obviously US economy is based on Supply and Demand adjustments therefore finally the most advance individuals are to succeed but when the educational system limits lower classes from stimulating education the potentials of many capable individuals have not being enhanced properly will bring disadvantage to US economy as a whole. The theory of Capitalism is based on ideology not on reality and therefore it is bound to change or US will lose its Most Developed Country's superiority.

The ideological status quo for government to protect and promote big business and large investment by closing eyes of shady business and investment practices generally lower the security of the assets in US which hits on the diminishing value of the dollar and the gradual changing investment to more stable foreign markets of Europe and China where pro social distribution of wealth creates "stable" demand. Which systems by the way are not sufficient and flexible at all but on the principle of "the least evil" work better. Here it must be made clear that Philosophy of the Economy's Market Stability Economics is not based of socialization of Economics and Governmental redistribution of wealth but it is based on a heavily regulated business and investment structures and increase the equity of US infrastructures and social expenditures such as Medicare and Social Security which security will increase the value of the US economy overall and retain its status as a Most Developed Economy and Market.

Historically, the upper classes protection was normal because in a system of Scarce Resources the statuesque has had progressive effect on the economy by creating relative market stability. The problem with this system as with all systems of selective access to competition is the ongoing globalization where US market could not be considered anymore above others and untouchable. EU, India and China are entering this competition which used to be regional for US market making it a global competition. Big business and investors are moving their operations elsewhere and the process will accelerate.

To not loose competitiveness US economy must adapt under these new developments and capitalize of and promote the advances in communications and other spheres of technologies, of the US infrastructure, social services and Medicare, educational system in particular highly developed graduate schools and promote their expansion, the globalization of the very flexible US business and promote access to global markets for medium to small companies and investors; which actions will establish a more open competition for more individuals to participate and the strengths of the US free market competition will expand and be empowered.

The US educational system is one example of based on ideology system, but the US graduate studies universities are adapting into these new global competition and finally the flexibilities of the US interest driven education will prevail to maintain its high status by accepting more foreign students. The looser will finally be the lower and middle class Americans being isolated from the global competition.

What is really changing historically and could it be considered a new development?

Very simple:

  1. The pro supply trickle down or socialistic economics are changing in a pro market stability economics 
  2. The improving high technologies, the globally expanding business freedom, the access of capital medium to small businesses and investors will make business not anymore limited to a few conglomerates on the Global Marketplace: the medium to small companies because of the new technologies will be able to provide adequate products and services globally. 
  3. Manufacturing is no more driving force of the economy: Global Investing and Intellectual properties are becoming the driven forces;

Life as we know it is changing and the change will accelerate.

The most advance countries in this environment will be the one having the best developed system to establish the best conditions for these new developments to flourish.

EU has very well regulated economics but the nationalism, chauvinism and overextended governmental control over the business are stoppers existing from a previous CILOD and do not allow the flexibilities needed for Possible Development for this new CILOD. Still EU has better then the US regulated economics which reflects the devaluation of the US dollar to the euro.

China's economics is a mixture of free market and socialism, and is well based on the hard working population which had been isolated from the rest of the world for hundreds of years the Chinese have cultural differences from the rest which well work well in their current organization. The huge size of the population and the market attracts foreign investment and foreign corporation which allows the Chinese government to regulate the economics. Communists and socialists' economics are pro supply economics but the distribution of wealth is regulated by the governments which gives them a pro demand market abilities. Their problem was and always will be the limited flexibilities to act properly to adapt to the rapidly changing realities: when ideology plays regulative role and ideologies as usual are not market driven; also because they limit personal freedoms it affects the horizons of business expansion.

What is the Current International Level of Development and how the most feasible Economics could be determined?

This is a Million dollars question and the whole study of "Philosophy of the Economy" is to attempt answering it. One thing for sure in order this to be done an evaluation of historical processes of development shall be done which must justify and trace historical changes and their relativity if any.

Chapter II History of Development

When Karl Marx proclaimed the struggle between of the having and having not as a main force for development he was wrong it is a struggle but it is between the Individual Desire for Competition and Social Tools of Suppression and Limiting of Individuals' Access to such competition considered socially unacceptable at certain historical point. When John Lock proclaimed the market competition of a Supply to Demand based on a Scarce Resources Supply driven Philosophy he was wrong because even at the time his philosophy was adequately reflecting the driving free market economics he could not oversee the coming of a pro Market driven Demand to Supply balanced Economics. The scares resources is a historical justification of suppression of Individuals Desire to Compete: putting this statement from Social Relativity prospective such suppression had positive competitive effect for maintaining Social Stability at any historical moment until most recent global situation. So the Marx's upper Classes in historical prospective had positive effect on development by establishing needed for maintaining such development Social Stability. At the same time the market competition of John Lock was a revolution by itself coming from a feudalistic structured Europe into a pro market driven world where the market adjustments were based on economics not on Kings orders. Things were changing a new Current International Level of Development was arriving.

What is a Current International Level of Development CILOD and how it changes?

A probable historical period when under the circumstances particular individual skills were considered productive for a society or country thus the society or country's tolerated and promoted such individual competition to maintain internal stability and advance in the regional or international competition.

Usually changing CILOD are painful processes of changing classes' structure and redistribution of wealth thus wars, revolutions and social unrest have been a good indicator for changing CILOD. The approaching new CILOD is prompted by the new valued individual skills and knowledge needed under the new developments for a society or country to maintain internal stability and advance internationally;

Two things are of high importance at this time of change from one CILOD to another the Real Possibilities which reflect the socio-economic developments of a CILOD and also the Individuals Expectations which at time of change are getting higher: there is a relation between these two Relativities thus they usually closely follow one another: the expending Real Possibilities unlashes the constant Individual Desires for greater freedom of competition: the general direction of such competition is directed by the Real Possibilities and the current at the time possible spheres of competition: thus if we go back in history at feudal times the Individual Desires were much different from these in the 18 Century Empires of Europe and these from 20 Century Japan and even further different from the Post Wars Most Developed Countries;

The Philosophy of the Economy distinguishes and summarize these differences to show a very particular patterns in the world history which until now have been seen from other angles; by showing such changes it capitalizes of the constantly expanding role of the Individual Intellectual Abilities and the new historical role they are to play in the constantly changing new world.

From another side, if societies/countries do not adapt to the emerging new socio-economic accents they may loose competitiveness and even further disintegrate and become unstable.

Philosophy of the Economy is a philosophical conception of locating the historical CILOD and the related Individual /for individual countries/ Current Levels of Development and thus showing a different way of such evaluations from the used socio-economic philosophical conceptions up to date. This new way is progressively distinguishing itself from socio-economic ideologies, nationalism, racism or any products of the Scarce Resources Economics philosophies; it is founded on the most recent socio-economic changes in the Worlds Markets and establishes a new conception for sustained market development for the Most Developed Countries and Blocks and for any other countries and even individuals into the new Globalizing Market and World.

The history of the world is a history of changing priorities of the role of individuals in societies: the Individual Desire to Compete for socio economic success as a natural human reaction in life and Societies' from other side have established cultural and regulatory systems to keep this competition under acceptable limits.

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More

 
Powered by Blogger